Rereading some posts; you're probably right. I recalled only reading of the Nikon F5 and Canon 1D Mark XVII, but perhaps that was another thread.

Nikon F5 (pro film body)? Canon 1D (first pro dslr by canon)? WOW, those are "oldies"! But you know, had I listened to the old news hounds and gone with a Nikon film system as opposed to a Zeiss/Contax 35mm film set up (I’ve a Hasselblad also, since digitized with a back), I wouldn’t have had to re-buy all the lenses for the Nikon FX set up when I (finally) switched out to digital since Nikon’s manual lenses work on Nikon digital bodies (sans metering/automation, though). Then again, got years out of my old 35mm film system which I donated to a photo college, so I can’t complain. But honestly, wasn't fun to have to re-buy my entire stable of lenses again when I switched camera brands (just saying, in the event you happen to have a Nikon F5, that is

avocat- is the Nikon 50mm 1.4 worth the extra $200 over the 50 1.8? I am not a pro and just shoot for fun. OP- the 50mm f1.8 is a very good value. It should probably be one of the first lenses you buy. Both Canon and Nikon has a version for about $100.

@Emy: excellent recommendation. As to the 50mm F1.4, the F1.8s are too much of a value to justify the price premium, seriously, unless you're really into low light photography. (Note: if I'm not mistaken, doesn't Canon have an L-series 50mm F1.2?). Otherwise, overrated. (On a full-frame it's nothing special--i.e., have to get in really close to your subject if using it on FX since it's just a standard 50mm on this format, as opposed to being a short tele like on the DX format for which the F1.8 50mm--effective 75-80mm on a DX--is one of the best values out there, I agree). I know artists and photo students who really love their F1.4 window shots, though. That said, DP did a review on the various F1.4s, which you can read more about here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08...1p4_review.asp

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpooPoker

You guys did do an awesome job. Thanks for all the thoughtful replies, its really appreciated. Im fine tuning needs/budget at the moment, and thanks to your help, its a little less daunting as to what to look for. Thank you!

Glad to hear!! And here's why I agree with EMY as to his recommendation (along with some more info): DSLRs (DX format) use 35mm lenses but have a smaller sensor than the 35mm film cameras (the FX format are effectively the same as the film bodies of old). 35mm film/FX format are also called full frame. On the smaller sensor entry and mid-level DSLRs (DX format), lenses project not the "full frame" but only the middle portion of the information (a cropped field of view). In non-technical mumbo jumbo what this means is that, when you put a 50mm lens onto your DX format DSLR, you effectively get a prime portrait lens (75-80mm approximately) because of the smaller sensor, but without the expense of a telephoto lens. Talk about a bang for your buck!! (How lenses work on DX-format DSLRs, you can read here: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...tiplier_01.htm ). One more point on Lenses (which Spoo and/or others may be interested in): If planning on moving to FX format (full frame) bodies, you might be interested in noting that DX format specific lenses (like Nikon's lenses marked with a 'DX' logo for e.g.) don't work on FX bodies (note: they'll switch to DX format to compensate, but might as well save the money and buy a DX camera if so). That said, DX is here to stay for a very long time to come (so no worries). If you see a good deal on a DX-lens-and there are many--don't hesitate to buy it for your entry or mid-level (DX) DSLR camera, no matter what a salesperson tries to tell you about the "future" (like trying to talk you out of a deal and into something more expensive which you might not ever need). For more info about this and the different formats, see: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/fx-dx-future.htm ). Hope this helps. @OTC: you're welcome, and again, my pleasure. tl/DR: ENJOY the wonderful world of digital photography--I warn you again, though, Spoo: it's been known to be addictive!

the question is do you really need a dslr? i would say for majority of consumers today all they really need is a decent p&s that give you as much customizability as dslrs. unless you're going to buy a ton of different lenses i would just look into for non changeable lenses....i find that most ppl after a few months find that dslrs are very cumbersome and rarely take them (except on photoshooting projects) and use above point and shoots to carry daily as they're much more portable.

Great practical advice. I think this swayed me. I can see this happening, where the camera just stays in the closet. I am going to get an Lumix LX3 or a Canon S90. I will try to take it everywhere, and actually take lots of photos.. I will upgrade to a DSLR if I really take an interest in photography, and I hit true limitations with these compacts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by afterglow

Do you want to have more control over your camera and are willing to take the time to learn?? Or do you just want something that's "automatic" and will do your eBay and WAYWRN shots with minimum fuss??? I need to know your level of commitment/expectations before recommending something.

I mainly want Ebay closeups and indoor WAYWRN shots. Will the LX3 or S90 suffice?

Quote:

Originally Posted by afterglow

Thanks for the specifics. In your case, I'd go for a prosumer. Something like the Panasonic Lumix LX3 or LX5 or Canon G11 or G12. SLR's really need a higher level of commitment to perform their best. And you do need to switch lenses. The Micro 4/3 cameras have a role but have too many compromises IMHO. And you'll still need to switch lenses. The prosumers have manual controls if you want to play around with them. They'll also do fine in their Auto modes. Plus their lenses and macro mode are very versatile.

the new olympus 4/3rds are coming out so there will be a further price drop.

you can find superdeals on the olympus 4/3rds if you wait/look around.

bought an ep-1 for $399 on http://www.shnoop.com/index.php last month. I even ended up canceling the order (because I already have a gf-1) and my wife didn't want it (and since shnoop works/ships out of brooklyn i had to pay tax on it).

you can get the E-PL1 (the lower but actually faster version) on amazon for $450 but NY still pays tax with amazon (lame).

compact prosumer PS can take great pictures but its really dependent on the light and how still the subjects are.... but coming from a former LX3 user who made the leap to a GF1.. there is a huge difference in the ease of taking nice clear pictures with a 4/3rd camera (plus 4/3rds still have the optional fully automatic modes).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Great practical advice. I think this swayed me.
I can see this happening, where the camera just stays in the closet.
I am going to get an Lumix LX3 or a Canon S90. I will try to take it everywhere, and actually take lots of photos..
I will upgrade to a DSLR if I really take an interest in photography, and I hit true limitations with these compacts.

I mainly want Ebay closeups and indoor WAYWRN shots.
Will the LX3 or S90 suffice?

I would say go S95...my dad (who is a pro-photographer) got one just before christmas after giving my mom the S90 for christmas last year and they are both awesome little cameras. The S95 corrects a few complaints about the S90 but for the most part they are both stellar cameras.

Same sensor as the G series with a slightly smaller lens...but they take great photos and fit in your pocket.

I would say go S95...my dad (who is a pro-photographer) got one just before christmas after giving my mom the S90 for christmas last year and they are both awesome little cameras. The S95 corrects a few complaints about the S90 but for the most part they are both stellar cameras.

Same sensor as the G series with a slightly smaller lens...but they take great photos and fit in your pocket.

I own both the S90 and the S95. Fantastic fantastic camera. It is just superb.

The only places where it will disappoint:
1. Can't get good bokeh - you just can't do this well with a P&S. Lumix GF1 does bokeh very well, though.
2. The sensor, while very large, is still not as large as APS-C or FX (obviously).
3. Shutter can do ~1fps with continuous AF turned off, which is fantastic for a P&S, but nothing near what a DSLR can do, so it is still tough to catch moving objects and people in burst mode.

All that said, it is the only really good camera you can fit in your pocket. Although none of the stuff I've read online mentions it, the S95 is appreciably smaller than the S90. A hair in each dimension makes it feel eminently more pocketable than the S90. I really don't care about any of the other feature upgrades - I don't do video, the HDR is unusable without a tripod (plus the S90 already does bracketing), and I didn't have any problems with the ergonomics of the S90.